Determining a Timestamp for Darnell

[Royell Storing]

Apologies for any issues.
Will make sure it's done like this from now on.

   DAN - Thanks for the lengthy in-depth work you are putting in on this project. I look forward to delving into the nuts-n-bolts when said project is completed.

[Mark A. Oblazney]

    I see this as a time-wasting analysis designed to give credibility to bogus claims and evidence denial...

at least they’re posting images to try and support their views on the matter, Albert.
all you have are words stuffed into huge paragraphs !  change your stylist maybe?

[Brian Doyle]

at least they’re posting images to try and support their views on the matter, Albert.
all you have are words stuffed into huge paragraphs !  change your stylist maybe?

   Form over substance...

No credible researcher doubts the pair going up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley...I see any elevated attempt to deny it as intentional trouble-making for the purpose of disrupting good research...Obfuscation through false rigor...

I'm surprised such a skilled researcher like Armstrong would risk his credibility by making denial of the pair as being Lovelady & Shelley a hill to die on like he does...

[Royell Storing]

   Form over substance...

No credible researcher doubts the pair going up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley...I see any elevated attempt to deny it as intentional trouble-making for the purpose of disrupting good research...Obfuscation through false rigor...

I'm surprised such a skilled researcher like Armstrong would risk his credibility by making denial of the pair as being Lovelady & Shelley a hill to die on like he does...

    There are several issues tying into the Darnell Film timeline. You instead concentrate on 1 single thing. Too bad.

[Dan O'meara]

   Form over substance...

No credible researcher doubts the pair going up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley...I see any elevated attempt to deny it as intentional trouble-making for the purpose of disrupting good research...Obfuscation through false rigor...

I'm surprised such a skilled researcher like Armstrong would risk his credibility by making denial of the pair as being Lovelady & Shelley a hill to die on like he does...

No one is interested in what you think.
You have demonstrated yourself to be a complete nobody, incapable of supporting any of the bogus claims you make.
Why do you even bother posting?

[Dan O'meara]

Anyone who doubts the pair are Lovelady & Shelley is just in self-deceiving denial...

The single piece of 'evidence' identifying the men as Shelley and Lovelady is the doctored image Bart Kamp "sharpened".
It is this single piece of highly questionable 'evidence' you have based your identification on.
Unfortunately, you lack the courage to admit this, which is in keeping with the way you have conducted yourself on this forum.

[Royell Storing]

The single piece of 'evidence' identifying the men as Shelley and Lovelady is the doctored image Bart Kamp "sharpened".
It is this single piece of highly questionable 'evidence' you have based your identification on.
Unfortunately, you lack the courage to admit this, which is in keeping with the way you have conducted yourself on this forum.

   I believe the Darnell still frame showing that figure standing in almost the identical position we see Lovelady standing in on Algens 6, is far more convincing than the Kamp Mickey Mouse'd image. And they never attempt to ID the other fellow walking down the Elm St Extension. Why is that? Because they can't pin a Shelley ID on him.